The Committee on Financial Disclosures in the Judicial Conference is reviewing a complaint against Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. This development comes after the Center for Renewing America filed an ethics complaint in 2023. The group cited Jackson’s failure to include her husband’s income in financial disclosures.
The group also alleged that Jackson “willfully failed to disclose” required information about her husband’s malpractice consulting income. However, in December 2023, the group learned that the court had referred its complaint to a committee for official review.
“We are hopeful that the Judicial Conference takes a long, hard look at the ethics concerns surrounding Justice Jackson,” CRA President Russ Vought said in a statement. “And ensures there is not a double standard for justices.” He continued, “The left made it a sport to attack the character of conservative Supreme Court justices.”
However, Russ noted that the left “turned a blind eye” to indiscretions and corruption actively happening. In his statement, the CRA President referred to attacks against Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. However, the Judicial Conference said on its website that it “serves as the policymaking body for the federal courts.”
ALSO READ: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson Faces Scrutiny Amid Allegations of Possible Ethics Violation
Jackson became a Supreme Court Justice, fulfilling President Joe Biden’s promise to name a black woman to the court. However, the CRA met her appointment with ethics charges. Following the complaint referral, the CRA issued a letter.
The group suggested that the Judicial Conference refer Jackson’s possible ethics violations to Attorney General Merrick Garland for investigation. In addition, the letter noted that the law requires federal judges to disclose their income. Also, the letter indicated that it requires them to declare their spouse’s source of income.
However, if the spouse is self-employed in business or a profession, the judge must report the business or profession. Consequently, Jackson disclosed her income during her nomination to the US District Court for the District of Columbia.
POLL — Should Donald J. Trump Be Allowed to Run for Office?
According to the CRA, Jackson said two consulting clients paid her husband, Dr. Patrick Jackson, more than $1,000 in 2011. However, in subsequent filings, Jackson “repeatedly failed to disclose that her husband received income from medical malpractice consulting fees.”
“We know this by Justice Jackson’s admission in her amended disclosure form for 2020,” the CRA wrote. Also, the complaint read, “Given the repeated omissions, it is appropriate to refer Justice Jackson to the US Attorney General.” Besides the alleged omissions, the complaint to the Judicial Conference pointed to Jackson’s recent financial disclosure.
The letter claimed that “Justice Jackson may have failed to report” the sources of her massive investiture celebration. Therefore, the letter alleged that such omissions make it impossible “to detect conflicts of interest.”
ALSO READ: Washington-Based Judicial Watch Files $30 Million Lawsuit Over Ashli Babbitt’s January 6 Death
The CRA further noted that “Justice Jackson’s potential omission undermines public trust in the courts.” Although Jackson filed an admission of omissions, the CRA condemned it. The advocacy group claimed that she provided only vague statements that “some” of her past disclosures contained material omissions.
The center summed the complaint up by criticizing Jackson’s trend of not reporting her sources of income and gifts. The US Attorney General’s office has not responded to the CRA’s request for investigation. However, the Committee on Financial Disclosures in the Judicial Conference is reviewing the matter.
You Might Also Like:
“It’s Murder!” X Users Slam Greg Abbott Over Death of Migrant Children
New West Virginia Bill Requires Students to Use Bathroom According to Biological Sex
Copies of Colorado Town Newspapers Go Missing From Stands After Publishing a Rape Report
OSHA Blames Mississippi Slaughterhouse for the Death of Migrant Teen Sucked Into Machinery
Woman Bans Sister-in-Law From Her House for Not Calling Daughters by Their Names
